Question Number: 20282

League Specific 10/17/2008

RE: High School

Gregory Kowalski of Harrison, New Jersey USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 20052

Recently, I submitted question No. 20052, which dealt with quick free kicks and the advantage rule. There seemed to be a conflict between the Laws of the Game as interpreted by two top USSF referee instructors and assessors and the USSF 'Advice to Referees.' Referee Keith Contarino stated that 'Advice to Referees is ALWAYS correct when it comes to US officials.' Referee Richard Dawson, a Canadian, began his answer with 'I will add this, not being bound by the ATR.' He then appeared to support the view of the two referee instructors. But he also made part of his answer 'FIFA additional guidance,' and gave some further explanations.
This lead me to some new questions. First, does each country's football federation have its own equivalent of the USSF's 'Advice to Referees' which would make for different rulings on the same situations in different countries? Also, when Mr. Dawson stated 'FIFA additional guidance,' was he quoting a FIFA equivalent of the USSF's 'Advice to Referees?'

Answer provided by Referee Steve Montanino

Yes, there are different mechanics and law interpretation guides in different countries. This is developed through culturally accepted ideas about the game, but fundamentally based in law.

The USSF advice to referees is ALWAYS trumped by FIFA, when the matter is specifically spelled out in black and white. When there is room for interpretation, then the USSF has the authority to issue interpretations in the form of 'advice' or 'position papers'.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

IFAB has published several documents of interpretations. There were yearly versions of 'Questions and Answers on the Laws of the Game', the last in 2006. That was replaced by 'Additional Instructions and Guidance' in 2007, which was not published by USSF. At the back of the 2008-09 Laws of the Game can be found 'Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidance for Referees'. This latest was part of a rewrite of the Laws, and contains information which formerly was found in IFAB Decisions and in the Q&A.

Regarding your question, Mssrs. Bellion and Evans wrote their book several years ago. We have questions on this site that are now 'wrong', and haven't yet been updated; we get to them either as we have time or when someone pouring over the archives alerts us to the discrepancy.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

If you want to advance in the USA in the USSF best follow their guidelines as that is what they currently teach. The ATR is a work in progress and updated as FIFA and the IFAB tinkle with their wording in the laws. You mention your concerns as HIGH SCHOOL level. The NFHS for soccer do not even follow the ATR and only partly FIFA ,they have in fact formed their own version of rules interpretation.
Right now I am in discussion because of OLD FIFA Q&A and the new FIFA I&G has raised something?s I simply do not understand. Also as a non USA referee I have to interpret my responses with their ATR which admittedly I am not always 100% sure of when I answer a USA referee question. We all struggle answering the high school questions because there again more changes. For a Universal game we do seem to operate at times in different galaxies. Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

I misspoke. I should have said that Advice is always correct for US referees unless in conflict with FIFA. Your question had to do with two individuals not FIFA or LOTG. Advice is always correct for US referees if there's a conflict between individual referees interpretation of the LOTG but LOTG and FIFA memoranda always take precedent over Advice if there is a conflict.